The other day, Ms. Siddiqui appeared in front of a Canadian Senate committee to make the case that the organization she represents is "moderate" and thus an appropriate partner for Canadian authorities who want to do something to counter the siren call of jihad that's luring more than a few Canadian "yutes" to Syria, there to wage jihad with ISIS. Here's a report about her Senate testimony from the Toronto Sun:
MONTREAL -- A Muslim social services leader made an anti-radicalization submission to a Senate committee then faced tough questions about her own alleged association with radicals.
Shahina Siddiqui, of the Winnipeg-based Islamic Social Services Association, appeared before the Senate committee on national security and defence in Ottawa Monday.
She called on Muslims and non-Muslims to work together to combat ISIS and al-Qaida but also cautioned against "religious bigotry by Islamophobes."
Committee chairman Sen. Daniel Lang and member Sen. Lynn Beyak questioned Siddiqui about her work as a board member with the National Council of Canadian Muslims (NCCM), formerly known as CAIR-CAN.
The Ottawa advocacy group announced last year it was suing Prime Minister Stephen Harper for linking the organization with the terrorist group Hamas.
Senator Beyak asked Siddiqui about the connections between CAIR-CAN and CAIR-USA.
The U.S. group is an unindicted co-conspirator in a $12-million Hamas financing trial that led to guilty verdicts in Texas in 2008.
"How can we trust community organizations to help us develop a counter-radicalization narrative when they themselves are affiliated with organizations with known ties to terrorism?" Beyak asked.
Siddiqui told senators that CAIR-USA and CAIR-CAN/NCCM are not related.
But, in fact, Canada's trademarks database indicates CAIR-USA applied for, and was granted, the trademark on the CAIR name in Canada in 2005.
On Monday, Siddiqui offered what appeared to be a defence of the Washington, D.C. group.""If they are unindicted then they're not guilty," she said...Nice try, Shahina, but it means no such thing. What it means is that, for some unarticulated reason--could be political correctness; could be sheer ennui--authorities thought the organization was culpable, but did not bother to go forward with an indictment. That said, I can't tell you how comforting it is to know that at least one member of the Canadian Senate isn't buying the spin and seems to have Siddiqui's number.
Post a Comment